See discussions, st ats, and author pr ofiles f or this public ation at : https:www .researchgate.ne tpublic ation319588343 [623793]

See discussions, st ats, and author pr ofiles f or this public ation at : https://www .researchgate.ne t/public ation/319588343
Social Competence
Chapt er · Januar y 2010
DOI: 10.1002/[anonimizat]. corpsy0887
CITATIONS
3READS
7,133
1 author:
Some o f the author s of this public ation ar e also w orking on these r elat ed pr ojects:
END-OF-LIFE CARE View pr oject
Pamela Orpinas
Univ ersity of Geor gia
102 PUBLICA TIONS    2,760 CITATIONS    
SEE PROFILE
All c ontent f ollo wing this p age was uplo aded b y Pamela Orpinas on 27 Januar y 2019.
The user has r equest ed enhanc ement of the do wnlo aded file.

The Corsini
Encyclopedia of
Psychology
FOURTH EDITION
Volume4
Edited by
Irving B. W�iner
W.Edward Craighead
WILEY
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
�o,o

SOCIAL COMPETENCE 1623
· .are complex, and social cognitive development therefore
··benefits from a diversity of approaches ..
··On the one hand, for example, tight experimental
<designs are needed to test specific hypotheses and
to allow for complete experimental control. On the
other hand, nonexperimental field, interview, and
·naturalisti c-experimental studies are necessary, because
'. not all variables can be manipulated and because
researchers often want to observe behavior in its natural
context. By combining the best questions, methods, and
'· theories from different fields, we expect the products of
:,ocial cognitive development to be informative for under­
standing psychology and child development. It is only
·through these integrative approaches that researchers
' wiH be able to fully shed light on the complex phenomena,'i social thought and interactions ..
,,:AJ:thur, A. E ., Bigler, R. S., Liben, L. S ., Gelman, S .. A, & Ruble,
D. N. (2008). Gender stereocyping and prejudice in young
children: A developmental intergroup perspective .. In S. Levy
& M. Killen (Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood
through a.dulthood (pp. 66-86) Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press
,:Dodge, KA., <Joie, J .. D., & Lyman, D. (2006). Aggression and
antisocial behavior in youth. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner, &
N .. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child development: Vol. 3. SocwJ,,
emotional, and personality development (6th ed .. , pp .. 719-788}..
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons ..
Egan, L. C., Santos, L. R., & Bloom, P (2007). The origins of
j.cc cognitive dissonance: Evidence from children and monkeys ..
s,;;,,, Psychological Science, 18, 978-983.
''Johnson, S .. C., Dweck, C. S .. , & Chen, F. S .. (2007) .. Evidence for
.infants' internal working models of attachment. Psychological
Science, 18, 501-502
\Killen, M., Lee-Kim, J .. , McGlothlin, H., & Stangor, C.. (2002). How· ·
children and adolescents evaluate gender and racial exclusion ..
Monographs for the Society for &search in Child Development, 67( 4,
Serial No .. 271).
,: .Kobayashi, C., Glover, G. H., & Temple, E. (2007). Cultural
and linguistic effects on neural bases of "Theory of Mind" in
· American and Japanese children. Brain&search, 1164, 95–107.
Martin, C. L., Ruble, D.. N., & Szkrybalo, J .. (2002). Cognitive
theories of early gender development.. Psychological, Bulleti n,
128, 903-933 ..
Rutland, A., Cameron, L .. , Milne, A, & McGeorge, P. (2005). Social
norms and self-presentation: Children's implicit and explicit
intergroup attitudes. Child Development, 76, 451-466.
Serbin, L. A., Poulin-Dubois, D.., & Eichstedt, J .. A. (2002).
Infants' responses to gender-inconsistent events. Infancy , 3(4),
531-542 ..
Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge .. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
-Wimm er, H., & Perner, J .. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Repre­
sent ation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young
children's understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103-128. Woodward, A. L .. (1998). Infants selectively encode the goal object
of an actor's reach. Cognition, 69, 1-34.
SUGGESTED READINGS
Olson, KR., & Dweck, C. S. (2008) .. A blueprint for social cognitive
development. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 193-202 ..
Pomerantz, E.. M., & Newman, L. S .. (2000). Looking in on the chil­
dren: Using developmental psychology as a tool for hypothesis
testing and model building in social psychology .. Personality and
Social Psychology &view, 4, 300-316 ..
KrusTINA R. OLSON
Yale University
KrusTIN SHUTis
Harvard University
See also: Cognitive Development; Cognitive Neuroscience;
Social L.earning Theor y
SOCIAL COMPETENCE
Social competence is defined as the ability to handle social
interactions effectively .. In other words, social competence
refers to getting along well with others, being able to form
and maintain close relationships, and responding in adap­
tive ways in social settings. Given the complexity of social
interactions, social competence is the product of a wide
range of cognitive abilities, emotional processes, behav­
ioral skills, social awareness, and personal and cultural
values related to interpersonal relationships. To further
complicate the understanding of this concept, social com­
petence is dependent on developmental characteristics
(i.e., expectations of social competence vary by age of
person), the specific social situation (i.e .. , people may be
socially competent in one situation but not in another, or a
child may appear more competent when interacting with
a socially skilled partner than with a shy person), and cul­
tural characteristics (i.e .. , specific acts of social competence
are bound by cultural expectations). In an effort to inte­
grate these components, Orpinas and Home (2006) defined
social competence as "a person's age-appropriate knowl­
edge and skills for functioning peacefully and creatively in
his or her own community or social environment" (p. 108) ..
Cognitions, emotions, behavioral skills, values, and
awareness are closely interconnected in socially compe­
tent behavior and consequently difficult to define inde­
pendently of the other components. For organizational
purposes, this article details the characteristics of each
of these components, highlighting the concepts most fre­
quently used in research, with the understanding that they
frequently overlap .. For example, solving a conflict with a

1624 SOCIAl. COMPHENCE
colleague or classmate requires cognitive skills related
to problem solving, as well as emotional management of
negative feelings and values that support friendship and
mutually respectful work..
Several cognitive abilities are important for increasing
social competence: (1) problem solving-identify the prob­
lem and the expected goal, brainstorm solutions, foresee
possible consequences of the actions, accept consequences
of own behavior, choose a solution, and evaluate whether
theosolution is helping to achieve the desired goal; (2)
understanding the relation among beliefs, emotions, and
behaviors-recognize the influence of beliefs on emotions
and of emotions on behaviors and identify and change
beliefs that lead to unwanted results; and (3) being able
to implement a variety of strategies for handling conflict,
such as apologizing, avoiding or ignoring situations, and
resolving the problem.
Emotional processes related to social competence
include (1) being aware of emotions-recognize different
emotions in self and others, and understand verbal and
nonverbal communication of emotions; (2) maintaining
calmness-value the importance of calming down, be able
to calm down in difficult situations, use self-control, and
evaluate one's own behavior before acting; (3) maintain­
ing connection to others-recognize common interests,
communicate negative emotions (e .. g .. , anger, frustration,
disappointment) while maintaining the relationship, and
communicate positive emotions (�.g., affection, pride in
others' achievements); and (4) being empathic or taking
social perspective, that is, understanding the social
interaction from the perspective of the other person.
In addition to the skills mentioned above, other behav­
ioral skills involved in social competence include (1) gen­
eral verbal communication skills-introduce oneself,
interrupt politely, initiate a conversation, express feelings
without blaming or berating others, express ideas without
attacking others, and maintain an interesting conversa­
tion; (2) general listening skills-pay attention to verbal
and nonverbal clues, maintain eye contact, summarize
what others have said, and listen to others while trying to
understand; and (3) friendliness and respect-ask for per­
mission, be thankful, offer help, express concern for others,
give compliments, smile, and cooperate with others.
A somewhat controversial aspect of social competence
is the role of personal values in effective interpersonal
relationships.. From one perspective, an interaction can
be socially competent if the person is achieving his or
her social goals, independently of the motives behind that
interaction (e.g., a socially skilled bully may befriend a
classmate to obtain personal information, which is then
used to manipulate the peer). From a different standpoint,
social competence is by definition a positive interaction
that promotes a collaborative and constructive relation­
ship. Thus, from this latter perspective, interactions based
on manipulation or domination would not be socially com­
petent. The least researched aspect of social compet enca,
awareness of social expectations based on cultural valu
and group norms. Each culture has values that sha
social interactions, and evaluation of social comp eten·
is limited by the appropriateness of the interactions
given social setting. Simil arly, group values will influen
the perception of what is a socially competent behtt'
ior and how well the person enacts that behavi or .. F
example, a studious child may be socially competent ii{
niche of high achieving students, but may have diffic ul
connecting and interacting with students who value p · ·
tying and dismiss academic success. Culture defines h
much, when, and for whom specific behaviors-suc h ·
assertiveness, defiance, self-expression, cooperation, s '°
ness, or aggression-are accepted, rewarded, or punish·
Culture also sets the expectations for important deve lo
mental aspects associated with social competence, su;
as the relationship with parents, the communication wi .
elders, the initiation of dating and intimacy, and the ch
acteristics of friendship.
Because social competence is such a broad concept, i
measurement can be a complex endeavor .. In consequen�
researchers frequently measure only just a few specit,,
components .. Most commonly used measures include re!
tionships with peers (e .. g .. , acceptance by peers, developiii
positive friendships, popularity, sociometric status), pro.
lem solving (e.g., self-control, management of aggressio
and anger, victimization), and specific skills and valu: .
(e.g., being helpful or empathic).
In spite of the complexity of the construct and its
parate criteria to measure it, 30 years of research on sod
competence have shown that children who are social
competent are more likely to report better overall ps
chological well-being and higher academic achieve men
Conversely, loneliness and dissatisfaction with social rel ·
tionships are predictors of later adjustment probl erii'
including school withdrawal.. Thus, children who la
social competence are at risk for a variety of pre�e
and future negative problems. Lack of friendships or ev,
worse, rejection and victimization from peers, can lead
low self-esteem and depression .. Educators, parents,
mental health workers should intervene early with the
children to help them establish positive relationships ..
REFERENCES
Burt, K. R, Obradovic, J , Long, J., D ., & Masten, A. S. (2008).
The interplay of social competence and psychopathol ogy oveJ;
20 years: Testing transa ctional and cascade models. c7ziJ4
Development, 79, 359-37 4 ..
Chen, X.., & French, D C. (2008) Children's social compe tence
cultural context .. Annual R.evi£w of Psychology , 59, 591-616
Dirks, M.A., Treat, T. A., & Weersing, V. R. (2007). Integrat"
theoretical, measurement, and intervention models of you
social competence. Climcal Psychology R.evi£w, 27, 327- 34 7 ·

SOCIAL. CONSTRUCTION 1625
iralberstadt, A. G, Denham, S .. A, & Dunsmore, J .. G. (2001).·
Affecti ve social competence., Social Development, 10, 79-119.
Ran, H S , & Kemple, K M. (2006). Components of social com­.petence and strategies of support: Considering what to teach
and how. Early ChildlzoodEducationJournal, 34, 241-246.
'Junttila, �., Voeten, M., Kaukiainen, A., & Vauras, M. (2006).
_·. Multiso urce assessment of children's social competence, Edu­
-· , cational &Psy ch.ologicalMeasurement, 66, 874-895.
<.·, ·.
' :Masten, A S., & Coatsworth, J.. D. (1998). The development
of compe tence in favorable and unfavorable environments:
Less ons from research on successful children. American Psy­
ch.olog ist, 53, 205-220
·trpinas, P., & Horne, A M. (2006), Bullying prevention; Creating a
positive sch.ool climate and developing social competence. Washing­
ton, DC: American Psychological Association ..
·.kose-Krasnor, L. (1997). The nature of social competence: A
theoretical review. Social Development, 6, 111-135.,
p AMELA 0RPINAS
University of Georgia
See also: Conflict Resolution; Emotional Intelligence;
··-·Interpersonal Relationships; Social Skills Training
'OCIAL. CONSTRUCTION
e phrase social, construction refers to a tradition of schol­
�hip that traces the origin of knowledge, meaning, or
. , derstanding to human relationships. The term construe­
' iwiis sometimes used interchangeably, but scholarship
1s�ociated with constructivism tends to trace the origin of
'eople 's constructions of the world to processes inherent in
tJ:ie individual mind, as opposed to human relationships.
�though one may trace early roots of social construct to
:Vico, Nietzsche, and Dewey, scholars often view Berger
,, .. ,d Luckmann's 1966 volume, The Social Construction of
al,ity, as the landmark work. Yet, because of its being
\foclge d in social phenomenology, this work has largely been
'/iclipsed by more recent scholarly developments. One may
'ocate the prima ry stimulants to the more recent devel-
pment of social constructionist thought in at least three
\iite independent movements. The convergence of these
: ovem ents provides the basis for social constructionist
· quiry today.,
;'; iTh e first movement, which may be viewed as critical,
refers to the mounting criticism of the unacknowledged
jdeological saturation of all descriptions and explanations
'of the world, including those issuing from the empiri­
cal sciences. Such criticism can be traced at least to the
Frankfurt School, but today it is more fully embodied in the
'Work of Foucault and associated movements within femi­
nist, black, gay and lesbian, and antipsychiatry enclaves. The second significant movement, the litera ry/rhetorical,
originates in the fields of literary theo ry and rhetorical
study. In these domains, inquiry demonstrates the extent
to which scientific theories, explanations, and descriptions
of the world are not so much dependent on the world
in itself as on discursive conventions. Traditions of lan­
guage usage set the conditions within which all accounts of
the world must be lodged .. The third context offerment, the
social, may be traced to the collective scholarship in the
history of science, the sociology of knowledge, and social
studies of science. Here the major focus is on the social
processes giving rise to knowledge claims, both scientific
and otherwise .. Summa ry reviews of these movements are
provided by Gergen (1994) and Hacking (1999) ..
The social constructionist views favored by this compos­
ite of developments have begun to furnish a replacement
for traditional empiricist accounts of psychological science.
In the process of this replacement, one may distinguish
between two phases of constructionist activity: deconstruc­
tionist and reconstructionist. In the former phase, pivotal
assumptions of scientific rationality, along with bodies of
empirically justified knowledge claims, have been placed in
question. An extensive body ofliterature has emerged that
challenges existing commitments to scientific progress,
empirical hypothesis testing, universal rationality, laws
of human functioning, the impartiality of science, and
the exploration of Western scientific practices .. Such work
essentially argues against the possibility of any logical
foundations of knowledge ..
Immersion in this literature alone might lead to the
conclusion that social constructionism is nihilistic in its
aims. However, this would be to misunderstand the con­
structionist proposals. Such proposals do not attempt to
eliminate any orientation to knowledge but rather to locate
all such orientations in culture and histo ry-including its
own. Within the reconstructive phase, the chief focus is on
ways in which scientific inquiry and practice, informed by
constructionist views, can more effectively serve the soci-·
ety of which it is a part. Such issues are at the forefront of
contemporary discussion. When applied to the domain of
psychological stu�y, the constructionist orientation invites
the following:
1.Pragmatic Utility
Constructionists are critical of traditional claims
that psychological inquiry should be aimed at estab­
lishing transhistoricaJ and transcultural knowledge.
First, such claims do not ·take into account their
constructed character of scientific knowledge and
the consequent possibility of an infinite'· number
of alternative accounts, Second, such claims lend
themselves to Western imperialism, in which West­
ern categories of understanding are presumed to be
fundamental .. Third, such claims seem blind to the
continuous process of meaning making from which
new patterns of behavior can emerge at any time.
View publication statsView publication stats